header-logo header-logo

Limits of the Great Repeal Bill

22 March 2017
Issue: 7739 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

The current reciprocal rules for enforcing civil justice across the EU cannot be replicated by the Great Repeal Bill, a committee of Peers has found.

In a report published this week, Brexit: justice for families, individuals and businesses?, the House of Lords EU Justice Sub-Committee gave a dire warning about access to justice across the EU for families and businesses post-Brexit. 

The committee found that the current system for civil justice cooperation across the EU member states works well, with both family and commercial disputes that cross borders currently settled by judgments that are enforceable across the EU. However, Brexit will usher in several changes.

The committee found that, unless the current system of “mutual recognition” of judgments across the EU is duplicated, not only will the advantages be lost, but there will be real hardship for families and businesses, who could be left subject to national rules across 27 other member states.

It argued that alternatives to the existing framework of civil justice cooperation must be in place before the UK withdraws from the EU. Falling back on common law and earlier international agreements would condemn UK citizens to uncertainty and diminished access to justice, it said.

Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws, the committee’s chair, said: “Unless the government can agree a replacement of the existing rules on mutual recognition of judgments, there will be great uncertainty over access to justice for families, businesses and individuals.

“The committee heard clear and conclusive evidence that there is no means by which the reciprocal rules currently in place can be replicated in the Great Repeal Bill. Domestic legislation can’t bind the other 27 member states.

“We therefore call on the government to secure adequate alternative arrangements, whether as part of a withdrawal agreement or a transitional deal.”

Issue: 7739 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll